I am sad to see the following on this list (addressed to a list member
who was making a relevant technical point):
>
> If you don't have time or inclination to contribute positively, for goodness sake get out of the way.
>
I believe the concern, that sites attempting to accomodate one
disability might gratuitously disable users with other disabilities,
is valid in BOTH directions. Perhaps instead of squabbling, we might
explore solutions. This could be an appropriate application for
content-negotiation technology, which is already being used to secure
appropriate content for different media, languages, character-sets etc.
This would require the client-browser to send an HTTP header such as
Accomodate: cd2
(meaning "accomodate cognitively disabled persons functioning at 2nd
grade level"); or
Accomodate: add
(meaning "accomodate attention deficits - no amination, no irrelevant
or repetitious content"); or
Accomodate: fmd
(meaning "accomodate fine motor deficit") etc. This header would then
be used on the server to find or produce the most appropriate version
of the requested content.
Most of the technology is already in place in current HTTP servers.
Should it not be applied to accomodate disabilities, just as it is
already being used to accomodate different character-sets etc.?
--
Adam Reed
areed2@calstatela.edu
Context matters. Seldom does *anything* have only one cause.